This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.
Facts
The case involves three challenges to the 2006 general election ballot in New Mexico. The Petitioners argued that the Secretary of State erred in including or excluding certain candidates. The disputes concerned a Second Judicial District Judge position, a House of Representatives District 68 seat, and the State Auditor position. The issues arose from disagreements over candidate nominations, withdrawals, and compliance with New Mexico's Election Code (paras 1-3).
Procedural History
- [Not applicable or not found]
Parties' Submissions
- Petitioners (Barbara Johnson, Roger Gonzales, and the Republican Party of New Mexico): Argued that the Secretary of State improperly excluded or included candidates on the ballot. Johnson claimed her nomination by the County Central Committee was valid and timely. Gonzales argued that his nomination for District 68 was proper and that a vacancy existed. The Republican Party sought to remove Hector Balderas from the ballot for State Auditor, asserting that the prior candidate's withdrawal was invalid (paras 4-7, 11-12, 16-19).
- Respondents (Secretary of State and Attorney General): Contended that the Secretary of State acted in compliance with the Election Code. They argued that Johnson's nomination was invalid as it required State Central Committee approval, no vacancy existed for Gonzales's nomination, and Balderas's inclusion was proper due to a valid withdrawal by the prior candidate (paras 5, 13-15, 19-21).
Legal Issues
- Whether the nomination of a district judge by the County Central Committee was valid under the Election Code.
- Whether a vacancy existed for the District 68 House of Representatives seat, allowing the Republican Party to nominate a candidate.
- Whether the withdrawal of the Democratic candidate for State Auditor was valid, permitting the nomination of Hector Balderas (paras 4-23).
Disposition
- The writ of mandamus was denied, and the Secretary of State's actions in printing the 2006 general election ballot were upheld (para 24).
Reasons
Per Bosson CJ (Minzner, Serna, Maes, and Chávez JJ. concurring):
Second Judicial District Judgeship: The Court held that the nomination for a district judge position must come from the State Central Committee, not the County Central Committee, as specified in Section 1-8-8(A)(1). The Court rejected Johnson's reliance on outdated Attorney General opinions and found that the Secretary of State acted correctly in excluding her from the ballot (paras 8-10).
District 68 House of Representatives: The Court determined that no vacancy existed for the Republican Party to fill because no Republican candidate had run in the primary election. Precedent supported the interpretation that a vacancy requires a primary candidate. Thus, Gonzales's nomination was invalid, and the Secretary of State's decision to exclude him was affirmed (paras 13-15).
State Auditor: The Court found that the prior Democratic candidate's withdrawal was valid, as there is no statutory requirement for a written withdrawal in general elections. The Secretary of State acted within her discretion in accepting the withdrawal based on the candidate's public statements. The nomination of Hector Balderas was timely and complied with the Election Code (paras 19-21).
The Court concluded that the Secretary of State did not err in printing the 2006 general election ballot and denied the writ of mandamus (paras 24-25).